Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26510452›Full record

ReviewGastroenterology report2015

Endoscopic resection of gastric and esophageal cancer.

Bryan Balmadrid, Joo Ha Hwang

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Gastroenterology report, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bryan BalmadridDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA bbalmadrid@medicine.washington.edu.
Joo Ha HwangDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
University of Washington · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) techniques have reduced the need for surgery in early esophageal and gastric cancers and thus has lessened morbidity and mortality in these diseases. ESD is a relatively new technique in western countries and requires rigorous training to reproduce the proficiency of Asian countries, such as Korea and Japan, which have very high complete (en bloc) resection rates and low complication rates. EMR plays a valuable role in early esophageal cancers. ESD has shown better en bloc resection rates but it is easier to master and maintain proficiency in EMR; it also requires less procedural time. For early esophageal adenocarcinoma arising from Barrett's, ESD and EMR techniques are usually combined with other ablative modalities, the most common being radiofrequency ablation because it has the largest dataset to prove its success. The EMR techniques have been used with some success in early gastric cancers but ESD is currently preferred for most of these lesions. ESD has the added advantage of resecting into the submucosa and thus allowing for endoscopic resection of more aggressive (deeper) early gastric cancer.

Indexed as

early esophageal cancerearly gastric cancerendoscopic ablationendoscopic mucosal resectionendoscopic submucosal dissection

Identifiers

PMID26510452
PMCPMC4650978
OpenAlexW2210455341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.